I’ve Been Busy

For those who have wondered where I’ve wandered off to, I’m sending out a warning that I’ll soon be back, at least for a short while. I’ve been busy, you see.

No, I haven’t been running the bulls. Nor being run by bulls. But the confusion in that picture captures the ethos of the past weeks — lots of stuff goin’ on, and not always the most pleasant, even when you’re in the thick of things you need to be in the thick of. I’m assuming, of course, that the chap who’s more than occupied on the horns of that particular dilemma was there by his own choice.

But, relief is on the way in the form of a printing deadline. My main goal now is to make the deadline without actually finding myself dead. After that, it’s a week’s wait before hitting the road to visit some of you who read this blog, as my wife and I wend our way North on Interstate 35. We’re still amazed that some of our friends and co-workers in ministry live on the same freeway we do.

During that week before blastoff, I hope to pick up some loose threads from previous blogs. Assuming the travels aren’t as arduous as a bull running, I might even post some observations along the way as both my wife and I minister in this subject area with Christians we’re to meet along the route.

9 Comments

You know, Kamilla, that I’ve run across some individuals who look at that photo and simply do not see the point at issue in it. Honestly. And, when you point it out to them, the first reaction some of them had was “Yikes! How did they photoshop that??”

Of course, it wasn’t photoshopped. I’ve seen at least one other photo of the same fellow, this time on the ground, in the same predicament as here. I didn’t include it, to avoid being thought bloodthirsty, even though there’s nary a droplet of blood anywhere.

Kamilla | Saturday, 01 September 2007 at 12:21 am

And here’s me thinking – wow, that’s not going to be a fun wound to treat. Will they have to slice the skin open to clean it? etc. That is just not going to be fun at all.

Hmmm. That is a puzzlement. Any chance someone in your vicinity at work would have an opinion on that?

In college, a roommate once acquired a bizarre punction wound. He’d been trimming his hair with a pair of barber’s scissors — the really long, pointy kind — while preparing to go to church. He put them in the back pocket of his cut0ffs — point up — and puttered around for a while, forgetting them.

When it came time to remove the cutoffs, he let them drop, and somehow lost his balance, beginning to fall backwards. Of course, he stepped back with one foot (his right) to plant it somewhat behind himself, to avoid falling. Yup, the sole of his heel came down on the point of the scissors. The tip penetrated at least several inches.

What made it look so strange is the total absence of blood. Another roommate took one look at his foot and removed himself immediately to the bathroom to heave at the toilet for a while. Yet another roommate came near to fainting (we were four, altogether).

We didn’t get our humor back until driving down a major boulevard toward the ER, with Kurt’s impaled bare foot sticking out of the rear window. We hadn’t removed the scissors (fearing the consequences). When we stopped for traffic lights, the looks on the faces of others in nearby cars was priceless.

After the doctor yanked them out, he gave Kurt a huge dose of antibiotics and sent him home.

Kamilla | Saturday, 01 September 2007 at 3:16 pm

Well, it’s a holiday weekend but I did manage to catch one of the PA’s from the emergency room on the phone. He says they would have to go in surgically and clean the wound but he didn’t know how they would stitch it up or patch it all back together. Either way – ow! And I am guessing the guy will be lucky if he doesn’t lose some function in that leg.

Kamilla

Leigh Ann | Monday, 03 September 2007 at 3:27 pm

Ouch! I think I may be sick. I didn’t realize the “point” until I read the post that accompanied the picture, because you would expect to see blood. I showed my husband and told him to look at the picture and then really look at it. He said he was no good at this sort of thing. Then I told him to look at the horns and he got it. After that he asked me why I did these kind of things to him. Hey, misery loves company.

Yeah, I don’t like needles, and that’s got to be the biggest one I’ve ever seen. It makes you wonder how/when he got off of there (shudder).

> After that he asked me why I did these kind of things to him. Hey, misery loves company.

Ha — I know what’s good for me, and showing my wife that picture is not one of those things!

–Michael

Truth Unites...and Divides | Tuesday, 11 September 2007 at 10:29 am

Excerpt.

Hough said that Jefferts Schori’s election is a “prophetic statement to the church and the world at a time when aggressive misogyny has reared its ugly head in many Christian communions, determined to restore the full grip of male hegemony in the leadership of Christian Churches.”

“She and her church in full view of the world have defied this trend and engendered hope for many of us Christians who abhor this sort of male exclusivism,” Hough continued.

Hough said that “since misogyny is almost always accompanied by homophobia, it is hardly surprising that she has been the object of virulent attacks for her openness to gay ordination from some of her fellow bishops and clergy in the Anglican Communion.”

“What is so wondrous for me to see is her refusal to engage in white hot polemics in response to this ecclesiastical skullduggery,” he added.

> “Jefferts Schori was clad in rochet and chimere with her black tippet and doctoral hood.”

Ha — the obligatory fashion statement. We’ve always got to know what the girls are wearing: Hillary, or whoever. Some things never change!

> “misogyny is almost always accompanied by homophobia”

Hmmm. That’s good to know. Glad they’ve got that connection right, anyway. Aren’t they forgetting “anti-choice,” too? So, if they’re lost regarding sodomy, must mean they are on feminism, too.

Can we try their approach and say that “feminism is almost always accompanied by misandry” or would that just be our “ugly, aggressive misandry, abhorrent male hegemony & exclusivism, and ecclesiastical skullduggery” showing?

> “She and her church in full view of the world have defied this trend and engendered hope for many of us Christians who abhor this sort of male exclusivism,” Hough continued.

Who’s Hough?

And can do they have to keep using “engendered”?

> “What is so wondrous for me to see is her refusal to engage in white hot polemics in response to this ecclesiastical skullduggery,” he added.

LOL, they can’t seem to say a word without slamming their opponents. Professing to be so wondrous and wise…